# A step down: Federal education standards

By Ze’ev Wurman and Sandra Stotsky | Boston Globe, March 13, 2010

**THE OBAMA administration plans to make states adopt proposed national academic standards** as a condition for receipt of federal education grants. The problem is what the administration has proposed is not near the quality of what the Commonwealth already has. [ Editorial: This is true, Massachusetts (MCAS) and North Carolina have the most difficult tests? ]

**High academic standards are the foundation of Massachusetts**’s landmark education reform success. They set goals for students to reach in each year of elementary, middle, and secondary school. The standards are rigorous, but Massachusetts students have proven year after year that they are up to the challenge.

**The latest draft of national English language arts and math standards **looks very different. The prestigious National Math Advisory Panel identified algebra as the key to higher-level math study and recommended that more students should be ready to enroll in Algebra I by eighth grade. But it is unlikely that these standards could even support the teaching of such a course in ninth grade. [ Editorial: The Algebra-too-soon phenomenon - when kids have not been equipped with the skills, thrown into Algebra prematurely is damaging to their attitude about math. Kids write themselves off as not-wired for math when they just have not had the necessary pre-Algebra prep. ]

…

**While the Commonwealth’s standards steadily move to higher levels **of academic content from K-12, the draft English language arts standards move along a yellow-brick road to an empty set of skill-based “college and career readiness’’ benchmarks. The content consists mostly of non-binding lists and titles included in the appendices. In math, the standards end somewhere short of Algebra II. [Editorial: Newton North and Newton South High School go all the way up to Math AP (Advanced Placement) Calculus CD.]

**Ripple effects of the common core standards would be felt** throughout public education in Massachusetts. New standards require new assessments to test mastery of them, and that would spell the end of MCAS. [Editorial: Plus the extensive resources required to train our school teachers to prepare our students for the new tests.]

**Ominously, Stanford education professor Linda Darling-Hammond** is overseeing the assessment side of the national standards effort. Rather than focusing on academic achievement, Darling-Hammond has long touted using student portfolios and other forms of assessment like “those that have been used in leading-edge assessment systems . . . such as those in Connecticut, Kentucky, Maryland, Maine, and Vermont.’’

**“Have been’’ are the key words here**. Connecticut scrapped its former standards and assessments in favor of ones that look more like Massachusetts. Vermont and Kentucky also gave up on student portfolio assessments because they proved unwieldy, unreliable, and too expensive.

I**t takes time to develop and implement quality standards.** The common core standards would be implemented just a year after the process was initiated. Only three weeks will be allowed for public feedback before the standards are finalized. It’s easy to understand much of the support for national standards, dubbed “no vendor left behind.’’ The standards development committee includes an inordinate number of folks from major testing companies. But state policy makers should think long and hard before scrapping the nation’s best standards in favor of an untested substitute. [Editorial: To their point, the developed countries that do very well in math have national standards. Countries like Singapore, Sweden, India.]

**The Commonwealth and its municipalities foot the bill** for over 90 percent of state K-12 public education expenses. While it’s natural to be tempted by federal dollars during trying fiscal times, it’s important to remember that education will still be a state and local responsibility when that money runs out.

Massachusetts invested years of effort and billions of dollars to develop a set of standards that are the heart and soul of the nation’s most successful education reform. Let’s not give them up for a set of so-called Common Core College Readiness standards that wouldn’t even get our children into college.

Article Source: Boston Globe, March 13, 2010. Authors: Ze’ev Wurman, a high-tech executive in Silicon Valley, who helped develop California’s standards and assessments in the mid-1990s. Sandra Stotsky is a member of the MA Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

To lend weight to his views, Ze’ev Wurman invokes the National Math Panel – of which he was not a member – but he doesn’t mention that members of the National Math Panel were involved in the writing of these standards.

His claim that the standards don’t support algebra in 9th grade is a perverse misreading of the document.

Read the standards for yourself: http://www.corestandards.org/Files/K12MathStandards.pdf

Wurman is against common standards politically and will say anything to stop it. He doesn’t care about Massachusetts or the Massachusetts standards. In other places, he has criticized the Common Core standards as being second-rate because, among other things, they don’t include negative numbers by grade 5. Well, unless I am mistaken, neither do the Massachusetts standards. So are the Massachusetts standards second rate too? Wurman says different things to different audiences across the country to bring things to a halt however he can. With the Globe editorial he is using Massachusetts as a soapbox because of its sterling reputation in U.S. math achievement.

In a recent post, you wrote: “Start doing ‘algebra’-type problems with your kids before they learn algebra.” Here is an example problem from the Common Core standards draft, for grade 6:

“J. has 4 packages of balloons and 5 single balloons. In all, he has 21 balloons. How many balloons are in a package?”

The standards call for a student in grade 6 to solve this problem arithmetically (using a sequence of operations on the given numbers), and also by using a variable to stand for the number of balloons in a package, constructing an equation such as 4b + 5 = 21 to describe the situation then solving the equation.

But Wurman says there is no preparation for algebra in the Common Core standards.

Read the standards for yourself.